1. ) Whether the doctrine of federal sovereign immun
ity has any basis in the U.S. Constitution or is pre
cluded by the U.S. Const., Art. Ill, Sec. 2, which
specifically defines the power of the judicial
branch to include "Controversies to which the
United States shall be a Party " without any limi
tation or constraint?

2. ) Whether the doctrine of federal sovereign immun
ity (whatever its scope is determined to be) can
possibly satisfy the appropriate constitutional
standard of review (strict scrutiny) when that ju
dicially-created doctrine limits petitioner 's consti
tutional right to seek review by the judicial branch
for the illegal conduct of the federal government
(or its employees) and when that doctrine also in
fringes on petitioner 's 1st Amendment right to
free speech and to seek redress?

3. ) If the doctrine of federal sovereign immunity has
any basis in the U.S. Constitution, whether the
doctrine of federal sovereign immunity is a broad
power or is a narrow power that applies only when
the federal government is wielding its limited and
specifically-defined sovereign powers?

4. ) Whether the lower court properly applied the nu
merous exceptions to the doctrine of federal sover
eign immunity when the lower court declined to
properly apply the Ultra Vires Exception, ignored
the clear language of the APA Exception and ig
nored Congress ' clear intent to allow for judicial re
view of respondent 's determinations under 26 U.S.C.
§7623(d)(2)(A)(i), which specifically incorporates the
rules and procedures of 49 U.S.C. §42121(b) to allow
for a direct appeal by the Court of Appeals?

Whether the doctrine of federal sovereign immunity has any basis in the U.S. Constitution